... Where he got the bread to go, there ain't nobody knows. All the Federales say they could have fixed it any day, they only let it go so long, out of kindness, I suppose.

With apologies to Townes Van Zandt.

Forcing your competition to have higher costs via the coercive power of the government is a no-brainer. Wherever it is true, it will workout in Wal-Mart's favor.

Crap, so Omaba bails out target because their to big because if they fail we would only go to wall-mart and thats evil, and then.......

Re. the Updates, I find it mind boggling that anyone would conjecture (sans data?) that Target pays less per employee for healthcare than WalMart now.

Forcing your competition to have higher costs via the coercive power of the government is a no-brainer. Wherever it is true, it will workout in Wal-Mart's favor.

As for data, lets see...one well known "robber baron" used a similar tactic to great effect. But its just history, not a ratio or anything.

meh.

Second, to one up you on cynicism, what if WalMart thinks it can lobby for higher benefits for full-time employees, knowing that it has fewer full-time employees?

Anyway, I asked for those part-to-full time ratios in my first post. Those are what would convince me, if anyone has them. (Surfing the web I see a number of '06 stories about WalMart making a conscious move then to more part-time workers.)

That leaves 9.6% of Wal-Mart employees without any coverage

That's from a 2007 article. Today's Wall Street Journal reports that only 5% of Wal-mart employees lack any coverage.

Well, for 46% of them at least.

I lost my good job now I make 8 bucks an hour, I do what I have to to get by,my company does not give me health care, so the **** what, thats my problem...... ****, go to the emergency room then work out a payment plan.....while you look for a better job....If things are relay bad find someone who cares about you and ask for help......

Of Wal-Mart's 1.3 million workers, 47.4% are covered by its health plans, up from 46% a year earlier, a Wal-Mart spokesman said.

Another 43% have health care coverage through another source, such as spouses, Medicare, the military or another employer, Wal-Mart said.

That leaves 9.6% of Wal-Mart employees without any coverage

...

Wal-Mart said Thursday that 76.3% of its workforce were eligible for health benefits in the most recent open-enrollment period.

That beats the average of 59% of workers in the retail sector who are eligible for benefits, Wal-Mart said, citing a 2006 Kaiser Family Foundation survey.

USA Today

I don't know that any of this is unusual for the retail sector, but usually Wal-mart gets compared to other Fortune 500 firms, for which it compares unfavorably.

Lets think it through. Are we going to get health care reform? Probably. So, does Wal-Mart sit on the sidelines or do they get involved and try to get the best deal possible? I'm going to go with the latter. So, they figure they are going to get hit one way or the other...how best to take those lemons and make lemonade? Why not make sure your smaller competition takes the hit too. You're big, have lots of employees and as such can have an insurance pool that is much more diverse than a smaller competitor. Could you get a better deal? Probably. Woo-hoo now you have less competition, and that means more market power both as a seller and possibly as a buyer. The latter could be key. Try reading about how Rockafeller made his fortune and built up his near monopoly in the oil industry--hint it involves rail roads.

Wal-Mart is already providing health insurance for its employees

Well, for 46% of them at least.